Discovery Gaming Community
Engines - changing the price - Printable Version

+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: Engines - changing the price (/showthread.php?tid=130334)

Pages: 1 2


Engines - changing the price - Fluffyball - 06-07-2015

The question is pretty simple, as someone pointed out in the other topic... there's no reason for engines to be so expensive. They bring nothing new but a different thing.

However, as it should not be done for free, my proposition is to reduce price into 500.000-1.000.000 price range per engine.


RE: Engines - changing the price - TheSauron - 06-07-2015

Nay! Moneysink. I see the point though, but 4.5 mils for an engine isn't that much in my opinion.


RE: Engines - changing the price - Fluffyball - 06-07-2015

(06-07-2015, 09:35 PM)TheSauron Wrote: Nay! Moneysink. I see the point though, but 4.5 mils for an engine isn't that much in my opinion.

4.5M isn't 'that' much, but it's just waste of money just for an effect. It's even more, if you are buying CNOS engines. Why to pay 5M for an engine, while you could buy that for 10th of that price?

Actually, making the price to 1/10 of original ones would be way better.

If we listed every possible engine change all players have made so far, we would end up having small fleet of CAU8 cruisers, if not battleships.


RE: Engines - changing the price - Corile - 06-07-2015

7,5M is pocket money honestly, I don't see the point.
Though one thing I'd really like to see is more engine effects. Disco is racist cause there isn't one that's black. Also violet I think would look pretty awesome imho.

I guess black and violet lights could also be added, screw the fact that it's against physics and logic, it would look cool.


RE: Engines - changing the price - Fluffyball - 06-07-2015

Quote:7,5M is pocket money honestly, I don't see the point.

It might be, but I think people would rather like to spend these money onto weps or something. Not denying it's wrong, but still... It seems like a waste of money though.


RE: Engines - changing the price - Coin - 06-08-2015

moneysinks translate into activity. raise the prices i say.


RE: Engines - changing the price - Fluffyball - 06-08-2015

(06-08-2015, 03:06 AM)Coin Wrote: moneysinks translate into activity. raise the prices i say.

Don't get it wrong, but changing engines is mostly a cosmetic change.

[sarcasm] What about changing price of pimpship? Let's make it 10 million per action, it suuuurely would bring more activity as you said. [/sarcasm]



You see, some people would rather spend these money onto something more valuable (like adding these 12 million to the CAU price), not some useless effect change. The only thing that would be needed as well is to, well, have some money from the basic engine, if someone's gonna buy a new one.


RE: Engines - changing the price - Alley - 06-08-2015

no


RE: Engines - changing the price - Jinx - 06-08-2015

generally "no" - because as already mentioned - it is a kind of moneysink. It may be debatable if it is sufficient at doing that job ... maybe it should be increased to a much greater price - but it should not be lowered.

The end result is customization and kind of uniqueness - as many games with micro-purchases show - this aspect is highly valuable especially in a game where other people can actually see you. Skins, effects, sounds etc. usually rank at very high prices - almost as high as actual game affecting stuff.

Personally, i would rather put the price for pimpship and engines in the tens of millions - the price of luxory.


RE: Engines - changing the price - Fluffyball - 06-08-2015

Believe me, Jinx. It wouldn't make people more active. It would make people not using that option at all, because it would be annoying as hell. No one likes to be forced to do something else than one wants.

I'll be waiting for replies till the end of this week (Sunday, June 14). After that, we'll see who's in favour of such an idea.